TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Don't Talk to Corp Dev

674 pointsby _piusover 10 years ago

34 comments

grellasover 10 years ago
Founders build value and then want to realize upon that value. But the typical road to success in the startup world is far from easy. Therefore, founders <i>are</i> vulnerable to manipulation and one of their softest spots is precisely the time when they think BigCo wants to acquire them.<p>I can&#x27;t tell you how many times in these cases founders have caved to lowball offers with horrid terms once they have gone multiple cycles with the prospective acquiring company. How does this happen? They ask for what they think they deserve and they get an offer far below that. Having concentrated their efforts on a possible exit, they sound out other channels and find there is no immediate interest. They are then high-pressured by the prospective acquirer to do the deal on a short fuse or the offer will go away. They then begin to contemplate the risks of continuing down the path of uncertainty and begin to contrast this with how nice it will be to continue the effort under the rubric of BigCo, where they will draw a steady salary and no longer have to deal with entrepreneurial risks.<p>By this time, they are hooked. Then the details come in. It turns out that, low as that $10M (or whatever amount) was, they as founders will have to earn all or a significant part of it all over again by having to vest their interest over xx years once they begin working with BigCo. Do they have protection from termination and the possible forfeiture of their interest? Well, no, not really - company policy forbids this. So, if they want the deal, they will just have to take their chances and, if BigCo terminates them early, that is just the risk they take.<p>What about elimination of risks? Well, here they must represent and warrant that certain things are true as of the date of closing on the acquisition. For example, they must warrant that their IP doesn&#x27;t infringe. OK, fine. But what does this mean? In a typical blanket warranty, it means that, if you sell your company and you know you haven&#x27;t done anything whatever to steal code or otherwise compromise its integrity, you still bear all the risk of financial liability if someone later comes along and asserts, say, a patent infringement claim against your IP. With a multitude of trolls infesting the world these days, this is of course possible. What does BigCo say about this? It puts on its official corporate suit and weightily intones that it expects founders to stand behind their IP and will not allow them to hedge responsibility for it. Therefore, it doesn&#x27;t matter that you didn&#x27;t know about the potential infringement claim - if it hits, you pay the price for any liabilities and for any attorneys&#x27; fees in defending against it. Is there a cap on this? Well, maybe, but at a high level (e.g., 50% of proceeds received on the deal). As a founder, you wind up agreeing to this once you are committed to the deal because, after all, it is not likely to happen. But as to uncertainty and risk? Well, that still belongs to you on some pretty important issues.<p>And this is just one issue.<p>The point is this: once you as a founder start to rationalize, there is no bottom. You have rationalized that you can live with the low price. You have accepted the liability risk. You have accepted the renewed vesting terms without protections. Maybe you also agree to an outsized holdback on the purchase price. And who knows what else. The point is, by this time you are fried. You have no will to fight back. You have no leverage. You are stuck with the wishful thought that it will nonetheless be great to be working for BigCo and to have a chance to continue to realize your dream, even if it does involve some serious compromises.<p>I have witnessed this sort of thing for years and it always comes about when founders deal with professional acquisition teams from a perspective of relative weakness. They suck you in and then you need to fight like hell to get back into a mindset where you can tell them to take a hike. Most founders in this position just can&#x27;t do it. That is certainly my experience.<p>This essay by PG captures the perils of this process in a way that is spot on and extremely valuable as a warning to founders who might succumb to temptation. Be warned. It is exactly as PG says. A truly important essay for all founders.
评论 #8877248 未加载
评论 #8877183 未加载
leroy_masochistover 10 years ago
I used to be an investment banker and dealt with corp dev guys (gendered pronoun used intentionally and accurately) all the time. PG&#x27;s article is spot-on.<p>One additional thing to note is that the diligence process can be an intelligence-gathering bonanza for a larger acquiror. The information they glean can be either harmless to you (data points on employee shares&#x2F;salaries allows them to build knowledge of early-stage compensation, which is very useful when poaching engineers from other companies) or harmful to you (they see your private information and act on it in a way that damages your business).<p>For what it&#x27;s worth, I would advise people approached by Corp Dev types to not only say no as PG suggested, but do so in 10 words or less. The email response should be &quot;No, not interested. Sorry&quot; -- no greeting, no pleasantries, no signature. You won&#x27;t hurt their feelings and a longer email is just an invitation to them to start a conversation that is going to suck up your time and energy.<p>If you are interested I would demand a break-up fee as others here have noted, as well as an aggressively worded NDA and a non-hire agreement that stops them from poaching your employees.<p>Finally, I would also consider the effects that knowledge of an explored-but-abandoned acquisition would have on your employees&#x27; motivation if they found out. Generally not good for culture and&#x2F;or long-term goal orientation.
评论 #8877264 未加载
评论 #8877542 未加载
评论 #8880630 未加载
LargeCompaniesover 10 years ago
Love to tell my horror story re: my experience dealing with a Fortune 50 company. Under a NDA til May.<p>We are an east coast start-up and two months into creating our tech&#x2F;product a large entity in the valley found out about us. This big name invited us out and talked about buying us. Well we have zero strong connections to such people like Paul Graham, but we did reach out to our network. They said, &quot;I don&#x27;t know if you should go or not, we&#x27;ve never had a billion dollar company like that make such an offer.&quot;<p>I wish I had found this post before wasting 4k on a trip and filing a provisional patent. We&#x27;re a bootstrapped start-up.<p>Well when we flew out&#x2F;got there to demo, this Goliath treated David like crap on a shoe. They invited us to demo, but when we went to demo at their offices in the valley they were blocking our tech from working(worked perfectly throughout every place we tested in the Valley including outside their building). Then they baited us with, &quot;We&#x27;d like to work with you, please tell us how you achieved this technological feat.&quot; We took the bait and told them our trade secret. They soon left our meeting, then came back and promptly kicked us out! Right before leaving&#x2F;being shown the door, one of these not so nice big wigs from X company said, &quot;The race is on, better hurry!&quot;<p>Ok, there was no guarantee of you buying us. We were cool with that. We weren&#x27;t cool with being treated like crap on shoe and then stepped on and disrespected! It&#x27;s hard to fathom that X company treats the little innovator guy as they did us.<p>Is this the normal?
评论 #8878027 未加载
评论 #8878085 未加载
评论 #8878093 未加载
评论 #8878031 未加载
评论 #8879530 未加载
nkozyraover 10 years ago
As neophyte founders, my partner and I talked to Corp Dev of two top 8 tech companies. In retrospect, I don&#x27;t think either had any intention of acquisition despite spending months at a time with us.<p>We shouldn&#x27;t have talked to them, but as I said, we didn&#x27;t know what we were doing. One of them basically had us reverse engineer our stuff through demos for six months and then abruptly ended contact. We heard through the grapevine they had decided to develop their own version, which came to fruition. The takeaway is they probably did this with a few of our competitors and simply took the good stuff. A lot of awful, sleepless nights working with their tech team under the misguided impression we&#x27;d see a nice exit.<p>The next one came not six months later, another one of the big (although aging) ones. As part of the dating process they gave us free access to a bunch of their APIs but nothing else happened or happened incredibly slowly. The takeaway there is they weren&#x27;t serious, they just wanted to keep us on the hook.<p>When we talked with VCs later (yes, later), they laughed at our naïveté and offered essentially the same advice - don&#x27;t do it. Don&#x27;t do it unless someone is talking numbers, very, VERY soon after the MNDA.
评论 #8882362 未加载
gaiusover 10 years ago
Remember a VC doesn&#x27;t want a company to have a 10% chance at a million dollars, they want a 1% chance of a billion, because that&#x27;s how it works.<p>But if you are a founder, a million dollars is probably the best deal for <i>you</i>, and your people, and you should grab it with both hands. Numbers made up but you get the idea.
评论 #8876866 未加载
评论 #8877624 未加载
评论 #8876976 未加载
评论 #8877477 未加载
评论 #8877337 未加载
评论 #8878691 未加载
mark-rover 10 years ago
I once worked for a company that was acquired - the founder wanted to cash in on his success and retire early. In the first all-company meeting after the closing, the CEO gloated over how cheaply he was able to get us. That was really grating.<p>The advice about watching for unsavory tactics is spot on.
评论 #8876734 未加载
评论 #8876846 未加载
评论 #8876633 未加载
评论 #8877601 未加载
chollida1over 10 years ago
&gt; Corporate Development, aka corp dev, is the group within companies that buys other companies. If you&#x27;re talking to someone from corp dev, that&#x27;s why, whether you realize it yet or not.<p>Can someone piece this together?<p>&gt; I remember once complaining to a friend at Google about some nasty trick their corp dev people had pulled on a YC startup. &quot;What happened to Don&#x27;t be Evil?&quot; I asked. &quot;I don&#x27;t think corp dev got the memo,&quot; he replied. [3]<p>Hey, Paul Graham not afraid to call out Google! Good for him.
评论 #8876536 未加载
评论 #8876742 未加载
评论 #8876534 未加载
评论 #8879410 未加载
评论 #8879535 未加载
noonespecialover 10 years ago
<i>Acquirers can be surprisingly indecisive about acquisitions, and their flakiness is indistinguishable from dishonesty</i><p>There&#x27;s some hidden gold right there. Non-malicious business as usual can be just as damaging to you as if they had actively tried to screw you over. Expect it and don&#x27;t become angry or take it personally.
评论 #8877858 未加载
holograhamover 10 years ago
I used to work in corp dev at a big tech company (not a typical silicon valley). This is pretty much spot on by Paul Graham per usual. I was typically the one doing the initial contact with companies (as a junior analyst on the team). I always found it interesting how many HUGE replies I got back from startups. I rarely ever saw a company take PG&#x27;s advice and say not interested. Companies that were over-zealous were definitely thought less of while companies that played a more aloof game were chased.<p>Also I can say first hand all of the shady deal playing is absolutely true. The members of the due-diligence team and even the corp dev director you are dealing with are NOT the final decision makers. We are building an internal package that makes it appealing to the corp dev VPs&#x2F;CFO to bless (and take to the CEO to bless sometimes). It&#x27;s several layers of vetting and it&#x27;s just as tedious and bureaucratic as it sounds.<p>I will say that the due diligence team typically will want the deal to be successful. No one wants to put in all that work to not buy a company. Corp Dev&#x27;s job is to buy companies so having deals reach the 11th hour and fall through is NOT good. They pride themselves on stats like companies evaluated&#x2F;year (wide funnel) and having a small fraction actually go to due diligence and the buying process. At the end of the day though, they want to buy businesses.
评论 #8880377 未加载
ph0rqueover 10 years ago
<i>Imagine what it would do to you if at mile 20 of a marathon, someone ran up beside you and said &quot;You must feel really tired. Would you like to stop and take a rest?&quot;</i><p>I wonder if PG knows about The Wall that occurs at ~mile 20 in a marathon, or if it was a lucky coincidence? <a href="http://adventure.howstuffworks.com/outdoor-activities/running/training/hitting-the-wall.htm" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;adventure.howstuffworks.com&#x2F;outdoor-activities&#x2F;runnin...</a>
评论 #8876985 未加载
评论 #8876915 未加载
评论 #8876755 未加载
评论 #8876684 未加载
peterjancelisover 10 years ago
I think the more important advice is: If you do talk to corp dev, insist on a breakup fee upfront, payable if no minimum price has been offered:<p>&quot;We can talk but I am looking for at least $xxx million and will need $xxxK &#x2F; $x million if you walk away during or after due diligence, to compensate for my time.&quot;<p>It&#x27;s only without a breakup fee that Corp Dev can smoke you out...
评论 #8877234 未加载
评论 #8884006 未加载
hnriotover 10 years ago
This seems to be written very much from the perspective of a VC backer and not the company itself. There are lots of reasons to sell a company, many are ignored by this blog article which does little more than make the M&amp;A guys look like a bunch of used car salespeople. Having been on both sides of the arrangement, getting acquired (twice) both times by Fortune 50 tech companies, and then buying companies I really haven&#x27;t seen the robber-baron tactics. Obviously every M&amp;W guy worth his salary will try to get the best deal for his company and any CEO getting bought out should have the experience to know the way deals go down. If you&#x27;re worth X to one Fortune 500, odds are you&#x27;re worth that to another, meaning the acquiring company has leverage to walk away. This either helps set the price, or the price was artificially inflated in the first place.<p>There are a lot of very naive startup CEOs out there, that&#x27;s the real problem, from the Fortune 500 side of the table it&#x27;s like babysitting most of the time.
ilamontover 10 years ago
It would be great to have some examples.<p>I was also wondering about how the acquihire scenario typically works out. Is it corporate development, or some other business unit making contact?
kikaover 10 years ago
Happened to me. I didn&#x27;t sell the company in the end (mtg meltdown, tech acquisition department got dismissed altogether, etc) and the company never recovered from me taking the &quot;rest&quot;. Wasted 3 years of my life and $250K of angel money. Guilty as fuck.
apiover 10 years ago
Great essay. I&#x27;m at an earlier stage than PG&#x27;s target audience for this -- still bootstrapping but experiencing 20-30% month&#x2F;month growth and getting ready to go that next step (probably seed).<p>At this stage I&#x27;ve gotten what after reading this essay sounds like the baby brother of this: the oddly aggressive hire attempt. These companies have been not necessarily direct competitors but people in related spaces who might want to add what I&#x27;m doing to their tech portfolio or use its techniques in their products.<p>The interactions have been quite different from any other &quot;job interview&quot; I&#x27;ve ever had. I&#x27;ve said no three times so far to some version of: &quot;your project is awesome,&quot; followed by some interesting discussion, followed by a hiring offer. The hiring offers have been decent but not outstanding, and they&#x27;ve included nothing for the project -- no &quot;acquisition&quot; to go with the hire. When I bring this up, the response is that my baby isn&#x27;t &quot;worth very much on its own,&quot; etc. In one case the response was oddly condescending even in its wording, which was discouraging until I went and read all the users raving about my stuff and then looked at my rather nice looking metrics again. In another case it was explained to me that while my product was interesting, I obviously wasn&#x27;t... &quot;business&quot; enough? That&#x27;s not how they put it but that was kind of the implication. I interpreted it as &quot;you&#x27;re not coming off as alpha male enough to run a business&quot; or some version of that.<p>In retrospect I saw these as negotiating tactics to shake my confidence in moving forward myself. These folks are trying to get me plus a lot (3 years) of code, users, and momentum without actually paying anything for the latter two things. Looks a lot like the kind of hardball PG is talking about-- I assume &quot;corp dev&quot; offers come in when you&#x27;re at a bit of a later stage.<p>Now I&#x27;ve got another one in the pipeline. I&#x27;ve decided the best way to deal with them is to go ahead and chat but otherwise to change <i>nothing</i> about what I am doing, to not spend much time on them, and to constantly remind myself that I am the one interviewing <i>them</i> and deciding whether to accept their offer. At this point given the metrics I&#x27;m seeing, the offer would have to be very good.<p>I&#x27;d say that the advice in this essay is probably good advice. If you do have the internal discipline&#x2F;experience to put these sorts of things in a &quot;maybe but probably not&quot; folder, it <i>might</i> not hurt to chat about it with them, but if you have any doubt or if you&#x27;re too busy just say no and move on. If my current discussion turns out like the previous ones I will probably do the same moving forward.
评论 #8876851 未加载
评论 #8876667 未加载
评论 #8876807 未加载
评论 #8877645 未加载
评论 #8877747 未加载
djb_hackernewsover 10 years ago
I think anyones answer to &quot;Do I want to sell my company right now?&quot; is mostly going to be &quot;It depends, what&#x27;s the offer?&quot;<p>There are of course circumstances where people absolutely do not want to sell their company, but for the rest of us... it depends.
评论 #8876729 未加载
评论 #8876646 未加载
评论 #8876616 未加载
评论 #8876898 未加载
评论 #8876660 未加载
评论 #8876606 未加载
danielweberover 10 years ago
Earnest: Aren&#x27;t there other things that corp-dev does, like arrange strategic partnerships and reseller agreements, that can be very valuable for a business?<p>(My personal experience is that these partnerships never live up to their hype, but my feeling is that one time out of a hundred they give the company a huge boost.)
评论 #8876760 未加载
评论 #8876731 未加载
评论 #8877297 未加载
cpncrunchover 10 years ago
I think if anyone pulls the &quot;my boss won&#x27;t do the deal for the price we&#x27;ve already agreed on&quot; I&#x27;d just tell them to politely fuck off. If they really want to buy you, they&#x27;ll pay the agreed price. Or you might decide you don&#x27;t want to do business with immoral fuckers :)<p>Although given that this was google, I would probably just contact one of the higher-ups and tell them &quot;I&#x27;m still interested in discussion the acquisition, but I was screwed around by your corp dev guy&quot;.
评论 #8877321 未加载
评论 #8876759 未加载
marcamillionover 10 years ago
I think one of the more interesting aspects to this is how much PG has followed his own advice with YC. i.e. he made something people (founders) wanted with YC.<p>That allowed him to craft the entire experience around what is good for founders which worked out to be great for others (including investors and acquirers).<p>So much so that this advice he is giving, I am sure many other investors have wanted to give publicly before - but they don&#x27;t want to piss off people who can provide an exit for their portfolio. The whole fiduciary responsibility thing.<p>But YC companies are encouraged to think of things quite differently - so much so that even if someone as might as Google (who PG pointed out) thumbed it&#x27;s nose at YC companies to spite PG....they would be much worse off, because of the quality of companies coming out of YC.<p>That is the power of seeing &quot;make something people want&quot; to it&#x27;s natural, logical conclusion.<p>Being able to say and do what you want, to force behaviour change in an industry to benefit your organization and your goals.<p>This is also why PG is so well respected by those of us on the outside looking in, is because we see the sheer audacity of him giving blunt advice, about specific tactics that only benefit founders. Even if it may hurt him temporarily.<p>Thanks again for constantly doing this PG. We appreciate it.
评论 #8879729 未加载
rokhayakebeover 10 years ago
YC should have someone in staff to handle these requests. For others there should be a company that exists for the sole purpose of handling these types of conversations, letting you focus on your product while they do the do.<p>If a buying founder has their biz dev, corp dev, contact a founder then it is safe for the receiving founder to forward that request to his corp dev, inside or outside their company.
评论 #8877013 未加载
lazyjonesover 10 years ago
This article is a useful warning. We got talked into a DD with a large german telecom (by our VC who owned 50% back then!) less than 2 years after we started. They looked at our contracts, our internal documentation, asked strange questions and never talked to us in a direct manner. No acquisition happened, they didn&#x27;t even bother to talk to us afterwards. We felt violated, unappreciated, insufficient. It took 10 years until we were willing to talk about an acquisition again - and only with someone who we knew was a perfect fit due to corporate culture and standing in the industry.<p>I can imagine that corp dev people know very well that founders who are willing to talk to their kind frequently in a short time must be desperate or greedy and not very passionate about their company.
programminggeekover 10 years ago
I think this is good advice, especially considered that corp dev could also be seen as a kind of corporate espionage program.
评论 #8876653 未加载
7Figures2Commasover 10 years ago
Can talking to corporate development be a huge distraction? Sure. But talking to investors can be a huge distraction as well, and a lot of the things that PG writes about corporate development folks are true of investors. Is PG next going to suggest that startups avoid the Sand Hill Road dog and pony show? I don&#x27;t think so.<p>Broadly-speaking, investors today are overvauling startups. Seven figure valuations and ridiculous convertible deals are being handed out like candy to early-stage companies with way more potential than proof. It&#x27;s a hot market and investors want dealflow, so they&#x27;re not quibbling. There&#x27;s also a greater fool dynamic at play.<p>This in turn leads founders to believe that their companies are worth more than they really are. In many cases, the &quot;surprisingly low&quot; acquisition offers these companies might receive are only &quot;surprisingly low&quot; when viewed through the lens of the angel and VC environment. On their own, they might be quite reasonable.<p>The big challenge for founders is that a high valuation can be a friend made enemy. It&#x27;s great to raise a bunch of cash on favorable terms, but lots of companies will eventually fail to live up to their valuations. Once your valuation reaches a certain point and the structure of investments is more complex (liquidity preferences, etc.), founders can easily find themselves in a no-win situation even with a moderately successful business.<p>As they say, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. This post seems intended to get founders to forget this.
评论 #8876781 未加载
AndrewKemendoover 10 years ago
<i>If you think investors can behave badly, it&#x27;s nothing compared to what corp dev people can do.</i><p>I didn&#x27;t think it could get worse. Jesus, what is going on with this system?
ig1over 10 years ago
A couple of things this doesn&#x27;t address:<p>1) Corp dev can also do strategic investment; you probably don&#x27;t want this at an early stage but can be worth considering at a later stage.<p>2) Corp dev teams don&#x27;t magically know that they want to acquire you, assuming they&#x27;re not connecting to you via an existing investor (in which case they probably have some inside knowledge on you already), they may well just be at the stage of trying to figure out what you actually do and how you fit into the ecosystem. So it might be worth having a conversation but not necessarily giving away any secrets,<p>3) Acquisitions are like investments, having a warm relationship helps. But they can be time-sinks and you have to judge how much time you want to invest when you&#x27;re not actively seeking.
robotover 10 years ago
I have been in this position once and the biggest lesson I had for myself was to aim for profitability and self-support in the company from the start. When you do that you have a much stronger position. One could replace profitability here with lots of user growth + VC money.
orphover 10 years ago
Something not mentioned but which is very important is the price anchoring that happens once you get a serious figure out of corpdev.<p>Future talks will be anchored on the initial figure regardless of your success in the meantime.
rocky1138over 10 years ago
I wonder which company it was who recently, mistakenly, spoke to a corp dev, and inspired Mr. Graham to write this!
clairityover 10 years ago
i appreciate this as a first approximation of what a founder should do, but it presumes some specific clarity that is somewhat rare (which i&#x27;d guess even pg would concede). for example, sometimes you don&#x27;t know that the person contacting you is corp dev, sometimes founders differ on when they should sell, and sometimes you may have differing feelings from day to day.<p>in my limited experience, these kinds of discussions usually end in email. they likely wouldn&#x27;t give you a number, but would it hurt to ask for an offer to see if they&#x27;re serious before taking a meeting? the &quot;we&#x27;re focused on growing&quot; answer can always be thrown out to end the discussion if it&#x27;s not solidly serious.
评论 #8876717 未加载
golemotronover 10 years ago
&gt; And that is the most innocent of their tactics. Just wait till you&#x27;ve agreed on a price and think you have a done deal, and then they come back and say their boss has vetoed the deal and won&#x27;t do it for more than half the agreed upon price.<p>Ex-car salesmen?
rpwverheijover 10 years ago
thank you pg
joegosseover 10 years ago
Some companies also call this role &quot;Business Development&quot; or &quot;Biz Dev&quot;
评论 #8877054 未加载
评论 #8876764 未加载
porterover 10 years ago
The problem is that most founders would sell <i>for the right price</i>. Everyone&#x27;s got a price. How do you know what someone will offer you if you don&#x27;t engage in these conversations?
balls187over 10 years ago
&gt; ...otherwise comparatively upstanding world of Silicon Valley.<p>Ask women what they think of this statement.<p>ETA: <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-13/code-of-silicon-valley-minority-you-can-t-be-angry-.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bloomberg.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;2014-11-13&#x2F;code-of-silicon-val...</a>